Learning needs and perceived barriers and facilitators to end-of-life care: a survey of front-line nurses on acute medical wards.

OBJECTIVES: Caring for dying hospitalised patients is a healthcare priority. Our objective was to understand the learning needs of front-line nurses on the general internal medicine (GIM) hospital wards, and perceived barriers to, and facilitators of, optimal end-of-life care. METHODS: We developed an 85-item survey informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework and Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour system. We included demographics and two main domains (knowledge and practice; delivering end-of-life care) with seven subsections. Nurses from four GIM wards and the nursing resource team completed this survey. We analysed and compared results overall, by Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation, and by survey domain. We considered items with median scores <4/7 barriers. We conducted an a priori subgroup analysis based on duration of practice (≤5 and >5 years). RESULTS: Our response rate was 60.5% (144/238). 51% had been practising for >5 years; most respondents were female (93.1%). Nurses had similar scores on the knowledge (mean 76.0%; SD 11.6%) and delivering care (mean 74.5% (8.6%)) domains. Scores for items associated with Capability were higher than those associated with Opportunity (median (first, third quartiles) 78.6% (67.9%, 87.5%) vs 73.9% (66.0%, 81.8%); p=0.04). Nurses practising >5 years had significantly higher scores on all analyses. Barriers included engaging with families having strong emotional reactions, managing goals of care conflicts between patients and families, and staffing challenges on the ward. Additional requested resources included formal training, information binders and more staff. Opportunities for consideration include formalised on-the-job training, access to comprehensive information, including symptom management at the end of life, and debriefing sessions. CONCLUSIONS: Front-line nurses reported an interest in learning more about end-of-life care and identified important barriers that are feasible to address. These results will inform specific knowledge translation strategies to build capacity among bedside nurses to enhance end-of-life care practices for dying patients on GIM wards.

Sacrifice and solidarity: a qualitative study of family experiences of death and bereavement in critical care settings during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Pandemic-related restrictions are expected to continue to shape end-of-life care and impact the experiences of dying hospitalised patients and their families. OBJECTIVE: To understand families' experiences of loss and bereavement during and after the death of their loved one amidst the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study. SETTING: Three acute care units in a Canadian tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Family members of 28 hospitalised patients who died from March-July 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Qualitative semistructured interviews conducted 6-16 months after patient death inquired about family experiences before and beyond the death of their loved one and garnered suggestions to improve end-of-life care. RESULTS: Pandemic restrictions had consequences for families of dying hospitalised patients. Most family members described an attitude of acquiescence, some framing their experience as a sacrifice made for the public good. Families appreciated how clinicians engendered trust in the name of social solidarity while trying to mitigate the negative impact of family separation. However, fears about the patient's experience of isolation and changes to postmortem rituals also created despair and contributed to long-lasting grief. CONCLUSION: Profound loss and enduring grief were described by family members whose final connections to their loved one were constrained by pandemic circumstances. Families observed solidarity among clinical staff and experienced a sense of unity with staff, which alleviated some distress. Their suggestions to improve end-of-life care given pandemic restrictions included frequent, flexible communication, exceptions for family presence when safe, and targeted efforts to connect patients whose isolation is intensified by functional impairment or limited technological access. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04602520; Results.

The impact of entrustment assessments on feedback and learning: Trainee perspectives.

CONTEXT: Assessment for and of learning in workplace settings is at the heart of competency-based medical education. In postgraduate medical education (PGME), entrustable professional activities (EPAs) and entrustment scales are increasingly used to assess competence. However, the educational impacts of these assessment approaches remain unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to explore trainee perceptions regarding the impacts of EPAs and entrustment scales on feedback and learning processes in the clinical setting. METHODS: Four focus groups were conducted with postgraduate trainees in anaesthesia, emergency medicine, general internal medicine and nephrology at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Data collection and analysis were informed by principles of constructivist grounded theory. RESULTS: Entrustable professional activities representing well-defined tasks are perceived as potentially effective drivers for feedback and learning. Use of EPAs and entrustment scales, however, may augment existing tensions between developmental (for learning) and decision-making (of learning) assessment functions. Three key dilemmas seem to influence the impact of EPA-based assessment approaches on residents' learning: (a) standardisation of outcomes versus flexibility in assessment to align with individual learning experiences; (b) assessment tasks focusing on performance standards versus opportunities for learning, and (c) feedback focusing on numeric entrustment scores versus narrative and dialogue. Use of entrustment as an assessment outcome may impact trainees' motivation and feelings of self-efficacy, further enhancing tensions between learning and performance. CONCLUSIONS: Entrustable professional activities and entrustment scales may support assessment for learning in PGME. However, their successful implementation requires the careful management of dilemmas that arise in EPA-based assessment in order to support competence development.

Readiness of hospital-based internists to embrace and discuss high-value care with patients and family members: a single-centre cross-sectional survey study.

BACKGROUND: Choosing Wisely Canada is a campaign that fosters conversations between physicians and patients about high-value health care. However, little is known about physicians' readiness to have these conversations. Our objective was to determine how ready practising internists were to embrace and openly address high-value care during conversations with patients or their families. METHODS: Practising internists in hospitals affiliated with McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, were invited to complete an electronic survey with 3 clinical scenarios: each had 3 low-value interventions that had been requested by the patient or family member. For each request, participants chose 1 of 3 statements reflecting how they would respond: a low-value statement agreeing to provide the intervention, an implicit high-value statement declining to provide the intervention without mentioning value or an explicit high-value statement declining to provide the intervention with mention of value. RESULTS: Forty-four of 62 eligible physicians (71.0% response rate) participated in the survey. High-value statements were selected in 91% of cases. The implicit high-value statement was chosen more often than the explicit high-value statement (65.7% v. 25.5% of all responses, respectively; χ2 range 4.46-56.23, p < 0.05). INTERPRETATION: Physicians favoured high-value care but frequently chose not to explicitly address value in their statements. Physicians seemed ready to embrace high-value health care practice, although they were not ready to openly discuss it with patients and their families.